tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3737633890176949647.post6797330959438930722..comments2023-08-22T10:06:28.678+01:00Comments on Discursive of Tunbridge Wells: We have the right to offend, but when should we? CCCU Applied Psychologyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12127528347937708211noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3737633890176949647.post-64663235192022666442015-01-25T17:47:32.063+00:002015-01-25T17:47:32.063+00:00The author makes some good points. I'd like to...The author makes some good points. I'd like to add that in a secular society, religion is seen as something separate to the individual, or as a 'thing in itself' that is confined to the private domain. This isn't how it feels for someone who is religious or for societies that base their affairs on a religion. In these cases, to attack a person's religion is to attack their entire identity and way of life. When we have so little understanding of people's beliefs, it is unsurprising that many who are religious wish to educate their children in faith schools so as to preserve a way of life or mode of being. But this too is criticised by secularists who, if they are honest, have no interest in whether or not the religious can practise their beliefs. This is how intolerance breeds discontent in our communities and starts a process whereby youth become radicalised. I'd agree with Angela Gilchrist that while we do have the right to offend, doing so indiscriminately is in very bad taste and merely adds to the divisions in our society. It had used to be the purpose of satire to poke fun at the rich and powerful. Satirising those who are already vulnerable and marginalised, leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com